‘In other news, President Trump has appointed Andrew Tate to be head of the Department of Bitch Make Me a Sandwich.’
I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong, but as I understand it, the SCOTUS ruling - questionable as it was - gives immunity for any illegal acts committed in the course of performing Presidential duties.
Trump’s interpretation seems to be that the ruling gives him the green light to do anything that is not in the scope of his Presidential duties (or authority).
I’m wondering whether anybody will step up to challenge this interpretation.
No, you got it.
Of course, it was a giant fig leaf and terrible decision, which Trump proceeded to prove at first opportunity, pissing all over their intentions.
I’m reasonably sure at least Roberts and Barrett will try to make that distinction clear in one decision or another, but they deliberately let the Fox into the henhouse. Telling it to stay away from the ones they marked off is laughably naive.
You’re basically correct, but there’s one subtle wrinkle that not enough people fully grasp and which is probably the most important aspect of the decision. Not only did the justices not clarify the distinction between what is and is not an official Presidential duty, they explicitly said they wouldn’t explain the difference, and would reserve for themselves the authority to decide, on a literal case by case basis, which actions constitute legitimate duties and which do not.
The justices intended this to be a shot across the Presidential bow: “We still have power over you — to wit, we retain the right to determine whether or not you’re operating according to the rulebook.” In their minds, they were defending their judicial turf.
However, Trump, being Trump, took it in a completely different way: “I’m going to do whatever the fuck I want, and I dare you to tell me it’s illegitimate.”
And now we’re all on pins and needles waiting to see whether or not the justices are vertebrates.
(Spoiler alert: probably not!)
Elon better not get too big for his britches and upstage Daddy.
…
No doubt this is the intent.
When you combine this with the likely answers to “who is paying Musk’s henchmen?” is either Musk (as a private citizen) or one of his companies, what is happening is that the private sector is directly controlling governmental operations. That, I think, should derail this entire DOGE clusterfuck. Heck, it wouldn’t make any difference if it was Trump personally footing the bill (HAH, as if!) or from private contributions (Oh! How can I start a rumor that it’s being funded by a foreign government?).
Transparency. Yeah.
I just heard a good line:
Wow. Putin found it easier to annex MAGA than Ukraine.
I thought Trump was Musk’s lap doge.
Not to mention, seemingly targeted at hobbling government oversight of his business interests. What a wacky coincidence. 
That’s just the kind of detailed cuts you can make after taking two whole weeks to audit the entire US government.
I think I’ve found the answer to my own question (#2067) re: who’s paying for DOGE. On Trump’s first day he issued an EO, renaming the existing “Department of Digital Services” to the “Department of DOGE Services” (keeping the same acronym) and moving it to the Executive Office of the President. Which, I guess, makes DOGE money come out of the same bucket as White House staff.
Department of department of government efficiency services"? Hmmm, doesn’t sound very efficient.
Is their headquarters in Los Angeles’ The The Tar Tar Pits? 
I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the intent were to prevent those fired from getting unemployment or other government assistance while seeking new jobs.
We’ve finally reached the Department of Redundancy Department level, there’s no further point to human existence.
I criticize various factions of Democrats on here a lot when they deserve it and I don’t often speak directly to the other side because most of it is already said a thousand times over, but I do want to stop by here and emphasize that Trump, Musk, and their lackeys are some real contemptible shitsuckers, DT’s only possible competitor as the worst president in American history is James Buchanan, and the betrayal of Ukraine will rightly be looked upon as a sub-Neville Chamberlain moment of monumental unfitness for the position.
When your kids are dying fighting Russian troops in Milan in five years, just remember this all could have been avoided if more people in the US and the EU had the courage to let Ukraine fully stop them in 2022.
Are you sure? Perhaps we’ve only reached the concept of the Department of Redundancy Department level.
Today a federal judge heard arguments on Trump’s transgender military ban.
The judge was… skeptical.
OMFG…can we be afraid now? Among other things:
“The President and the Attorney General (subject to the President’s supervision and control) will interpret the law for the executive branch, instead of having separate agencies adopt conflicting interpretations.”
There’s more there. It is all scary as shit. I am not sure it is hyperbole to say this is truly the beginning of the end of US democracy.
Can federal judges at this level dismiss cases “with prejudice” which usually means “You better have answers to all my questions or I will find you in contempt of this court” or do they get to keep cluttering up the court system with dumbass DOJ “lawyers” over and over?
Look, make a cogent argument against fucking pronouns if that’s your target. A good lawyer should never ask a question he does not know the answer to, nor should a good lawyer be so unprepared to not anticipate what a good judge might inquire of him or her.
The Order notes that Article II of the U.S. Constitution vests all executive power in the President, meaning that all executive branch officials and employees are subject to his supervision.
Oh fuck it all, then.
There were never three articles of the Constitution and we only ever had one.